California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: In Committee 3 R cosponsors

SB 965 — Worker status: independent contractors: healthcare industry.

Last action — Referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Existing law, as established in the case of Dynamex Operations W. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex) , creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission. Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the "ABC" test, to determine if workers are employees or independent contractors. Existing law establishes that, for purposes of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration is considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business. This test is commonly known as the "ABC" test, as described above. Existing law charges the Labor Commissioner with the enforcement of labor laws, including worker classification. Existing law exempts specified occupations and business relationships from the application of Dynamex, including licensed insurance agents, certain health care professionals, including physicians and surgeons, dentists, and podiatrists, subject to meeting certain conditions and license requirements. This bill would expand the above-described exemptions to also include health facilities, as defined, which contract with companies that employ health care providers who provide services to patients at those facilities.

Bill Text

What changed in the latest version

1 added · 1 removed

1 line(s) added, 1 removed.

→
Previous
Latest
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill TextBill Information PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites | Version:
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill Text PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites | Version:
⬇ Download PDF
View plain text versions (2)

Action History

  1. Referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.

  2. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 13.

  3. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Nielsen · Primary
  • Bates · Cosponsor
  • Borgeas · Cosponsor
  • Chang · Cosponsor
  • Shannon Grove · Cosponsor
  • Moorlach · Cosponsor
  • Morrell · Cosponsor
  • Wilk · Cosponsor
  • Brian W. Jones · Cosponsor
  • Megan Dahle · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 9 co-sponsors · 112 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Nielsen

Co-sponsors (9)

Not signed on (112)

112 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 112 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Subjects

healthcare labor
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 965 do?
Existing law, as established in the case of Dynamex Operations W. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex) , creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission. Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the "ABC" test, to determine if workers are employees or independent contractors. Existing law establishes that, for purposes of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration is considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business. This test is commonly known as the "ABC" test, as described above. Existing law charges the Labor Commissioner with the enforcement of labor laws, including worker classification. Existing law exempts specified occupations and business relationships from the application of Dynamex, including licensed insurance agents, certain health care professionals, including physicians and surgeons, dentists, and podiatrists, subject to meeting certain conditions and license requirements. This bill would expand the above-described exemptions to also include health facilities, as defined, which contract with companies that employ health care providers who provide services to patients at those facilities.
Who sponsors SB 965?
SB 965 is sponsored by Nielsen, Bates, Borgeas, Chang, Grove, Shannon (Republican), Moorlach, Morrell, Wilk, Jones, Brian W. (Republican), and Dahle, Megan (Republican).
What is the current status of SB 965?
This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track SB 965?
Track SB 965 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 965

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 965

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →